ML20147H596

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Transcript of 781218 Discussion of Reactor License Schedule in Washington.W/Encl 781214 Info Rept by HR Denton Re Dec 1978 Projection for Reactor Licensing Schedule
ML20147H596
Person / Time
Issue date: 12/18/1978
From: Ahearne J, Bradford P, Hendrie J
NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:
References
REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 7812270344
Download: ML20147H596 (47)
v • d • e


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:, i i I 1 f,..,'0 I 1 i ', 2 Transcrict of Proceedings 9, 2a ,p NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l ,i DISCUSSION OF RE;sCTOR LICENSING SCHEDULES (Open to Public Attendance) i Monday, December 18, 1978 l i I l 1 i i l l ) I Pages 1 - 21 l Prepared by-C. H. Brown i Office of the Secretary i l i "/8122703L L

k i DISCLAIMER i This is an unofficial transcript of a neeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on December 18, 1978 in the Commission's offices at 1717 H Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. The neeting was open to public attendance and observation. This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected, or edited, and it may contain inaccuracies. The transcript is intended solely for general informational purposes. ( As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, it is not part of the formal or informal record of decision of the matters discussed. Expressions of opinion in i I this transcript do not necessarily reflec+ r'inal determinations or beliefs. No pleading or other paper ma; be filed with the Commission in any proceeding as the result of or adjressed to any statement or argument contained herein, except as the Commission may authorize. i I I I l } } I t 1 e

1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA I NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO:OiISSION 2 1 DISCUSSION OF REACTOR LICENSI:;G SCHEDULES 5 (See SECY-78-661) 6 (Open to Public F.ttendence) 7 e ] 8 Commisrioners' Conference Room 9 1717 H Street, N.W. Washington, D. C. in Monday, December 18, 1978 11 ! -i 12 1 The Commission met pursuant to notice, at 10:35 a.m., q i d 13 Joseph Hendrie, Chairman of the Commission, presiding. l' 4 PRESENT: 1- ~ ~ ' ', Chairman Hendrie d. 16 Commissioner Bradford y Commissioner Ahearne ) 17 ! 13 :! ALSO.PRESENT: s: S. Chilk ~~ L. Gossick 20 ;j J. Yore l J. Kelley 2; R. Boyd H. Denton 22 22 aus 9

i 2 PROCEEDINGS i 2,{ CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Commissioners Kennedy and l 3 Gilinsky are not with us this morning. .I 4 The subject is a discussion of reactor licensing h schedules, in particular, the regular briefing by the staff, l 5 l I,{ on how these things are going. Why don't we go ahead, Lee. 6 i I 7 I i MR. GOSSILK: Yes. We had had some indication that L l h you had a cut-off this morning, 30 minutes maximum. Is that 8 q 9 h right or -- we don't have any great lengthy meeting in mind. 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I am not constrained that way, I i. 11 y are the others? 12 ", John, are you --- Ui 13 " COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I don't believe so. 14j COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Sam has an appointment. 15;{ (Laughter) H 16 ii MR. GOSSICK: That's where that came from, as a matter 4 17 '! of f act. It CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I think actually, though, it was 19 just a suggestion. 20. MR. BOYD: Good, let me bring up a point that was 1 21 asked last month in the briefing relating to how much time 22 the rules provide for the process following the closing of the

3 hearing.

And Jim Yore dug back into the rules and pointed

4 this out to me, for contested hearings the total period of 33 time, once the record is closed, is at minimum 90 days before you

C i 3 would expect to see an initial' decision. 2 And for noncontested hearings, it's 70 days. It j breaks down roughly.as follows: 4 From the day the record is_ closed, the applicant has 5 20 days to file proposed findings of fact and conclusions. .The 6-other parties to the proceeding, if it is contested, get another 'I l 7 10 days and once those are in the staff gets an additional 10 days.because you review the previous filings. o l Following that the applicant is allowed 10 days for c i a reply and adding about five days for mailings brings it up to 1 1 Jl about 55 days. 3- ~~d For contested proceedings the Board, according to the guidelines and the rules is of fered about 35 days to actually ' j prepare the_ decision which would bring it up for a contested proceeding, up to the full 90 days. u 16 j' In the case of noncontested proceedings the Board guideline is 15 days. So there is a substantial period of II " time'which we focus, for example, in Jamesport from the time the e

  1. l record ~ closed until the decision, and moving in to that, in the 1

20 ;! case of Jamesport, as far as I know the decision still has not t I ..4-

been-handed down.

22 MR. YORE: The Board said they will have it in the 23 next two weeks. ( J' MR.'BOYD: The next thing I think that is of significance b on 'he list,.and I.have marked them on the vugraph with a little f 23 t a. r. a,x- ,. ~.-

4 red dot --- 2 (Slide) 1 3 is Perkins. The hearing has now been set down to 4 consider the re-ceview of the alternative sites and I understand 5 !! it is now set down for the 29 th, not the 22nd, and on the basis 6 q of.the hearing being established, we are showing a two-nonth 7 slip or a decision date effectively in March. i 8 'Il In the Pilgrim situation, the next one down we are 1 9 showing a five-month slip relating to the reconsideration for 10 l their alternative sites. We have set this down as perhaps the n 11 d maximum one might expect with the assumption that the supplement 12 to the final environmental statement would need to be recirculated. 13 4 As I understand it that decision has not yet been made, but the 14 j prediction for the purpose of the schedule, makes that assumption 1 1 5 j; so we have offectively a worse case situation here. 16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Let's see, remind me again of the j 17 sequence in Pilgrim 2 which --- 15 MR. DENTON: The Pilgrim Board, about a year ago, 19 I think last December or so, came out with a decision that our l 20 review of alternative sites was inadequate. n J 'l We sent up a team to prepare a revision of the e 22 environmental impact statement section dealing with alternative ] 22 sites, then we draf ted that in with the Seabrook review, which the Board decision followed thereon a couple of months thereafter, 23 and decided we would use the results of the Seabrook review to the

t 5 h extent-we could. We have now completed our look at alternative i 2 i ~ sites'to Pilgrim 2'and we have been talking to CEO and the 1 g 3.i applicant regarding the appropriate proceedings to be followed 1 4 in modifying a section of the final environmental impact i e: q 5 statement. So the' time span here, assumes that we would issue 6 !! that 'section of the FES and request comment and issue a final 7 statement'later on alternative. sites, but there may be an j ) 8 opportunity that is available to handle it somewhat differently, j t 9 .since it is:really a modified FES. We are exploring that with l . 10 all the. parties.- 11 0 The safety hearing is closed and the record is closed 1 12 of all the issues except --- { 13 ' MR. YORE : They still have the financial. 14 {, MR. DENTON: So alternative sites are the main issue. i 15, CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes. As a matter of fact, it has 16 l been closed for some time, hasn't it' i i 17[ MR. DENTON: Yes. u 13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Let's'see, this is one of those .19 cases where an earlier review standard on alternative sites, 20 ! subsequently ch'anged and then the Pilgrim 2 case got stuck on i 2,.i-the point, I think. How many more of these have you got working in the 23 wings?' MR. DENTON: We looked at that this spring and we 34 jp decided to reopen Perkins. ' Erie, we could handle in the final l -a r--r-n,..,, ,-a.,,-,r-, n --- ~ ,.,,, - -. ~... - - -,

~.~ -i 6 t environmental statement which is not at issue. I think the 1 2 picked up out of the ones i only one that has not yet been 3 i we. mentioned is possibly Skagit, but let me ask if anyone in i L L the audience would 1Lke to --- l 5 l , i MR. YORE: Pebble Springs too, I think, Harold. I 6 i] MR. DENTON: So then just to complete that answer 7 and bring you up to today's standard review plans. l I 8 Let me just ask for a reason j COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: 9 u About the December date on Palo Verde 4 and 5, 4 j 'of.related concern. 1 0 il 4 has that 12en slated for December '79 right along? L 11 j' MR. BOYD: That is the date we set down with the h; j 12 ;! accelerated review schedule. ~3' 1 MR. KELLEY: Is that optimistic, do you think, or g 14 0 I y pretty realistic? 15jI' MR. BOYD: Well, let me jump to Palo Verde. il 16 I was going to go through some of the bad news and then l ' 7 ', finish it up on what I think is a note o,f good news. Our 1 1' 8 :a. schedule -- remember this is an accelerated review, we are o iQ l}H applying the NUREG 0292 accelerated elements in the review. -~ 20 Our schedule calls'for getting all SER inputs on January 9th. 21 c We have got about half of them now, we are moving people to come up with the other half on schedule. We are, at this point, 23 proposing a second public meeting, open meeting, out in 14 Phoenix to go!over the residual open issues and following that 23 we will get back together here, put the SER together, go to-

i i 7 1 .the ACRS. and go forward. -j l 2 1 MR.~KELLEY: This is contested, isn't it? j 3. MR. BOYD: It is contested. It is not what I would d - i! 4 call. hotly contested, in'our jargon,-but it is a c'ntested case. ) o 5 MR. DENTON: We propose to have the DES and the SER l ? 6. j' the later part~ of March. jH 7 !! MR. KELLEY: And when would the hearing start? l l N I 8 l MR. BOYD: So the hearing would be starting in June. l L 9 MR. YORE: Well, the Board put out -- the first notice J .l 10 ! was on health and' safety and they the Board, a couple of weeks

i -

i 11 !j ago, put out another notice on the environmental issues, notice ) 12 j of the hearing, because the environmental report was just published. )I

i i

~ 1 i 13!. And the people have until January 8th to file petitions on the 14 i environmental issues for the 30-day period. 1 13 j So we don't know what wil_ develop during that period 16 as far as petitions. But the cut-off date is January 8th, i 17 ' MR. KELLEY: The safety hearing first followed by d 15 !!.the environmental? / 19 q MR. YORE : I don't think they really know at this time. I 20 d It might be a combined hearing, I'm not sure. a 21 } MR..KELLEY: So you might not get under way in the 7; normal course of events until June? 23 MR.;DENTCN: Pretty close to 1* 24 MR. BOYD:. But that's what we are foreseeing for the . start of the hearing -. at least,for the safety portion of the l i 1 .~, ..m ..m ._e

s 8 1 hearing.

i 2

MR. YORE: There_will be a prehearing in February. 3 h COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: There is no LWA in that case? 9 MR. BOYD: No. They have three units, of Ocurse, right 5 there that are a building right now. 6 MR. KELLEY: That last number is predicted cecision i i 7 date, the 12/797 I i \\ 8 MR. BOYD: Respective decision date. 9 MR. KELLEY: So it is in December '79? 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Why don't you go back and pick up o 11 j some of the bad news now. i 12 ';, MR. BOYD: All right. 0 13 Black Fox, the hearing is still on-going. Our previous 'i 14 0 prediction which said there should be a decision by February, 1 I 15hconsideringtheextentofthehearingwasprobablytoooptimistic, 16 I so we anticipate at least two more months in going through the 1 \\ 17 hearing process. So we have moved the decision date from y 18 h February to April. 19 j Davis Besse, right below it, is in about the same 0 t 20 h situation it has been in for some time. As you know, this is 21 y': one o'f the CAPCO plants, and getting the final positions put I 2; together is taking about another two months. This is a

3 combination of no hurry on the part of the applicant, and the staff taking advantage of that situation to work on some more high priority stuff.

In general, I don't think it is particularly

2 9 1 critical in this particular case. l 2 The next one somewhat more significant is Allens I Creek. Allens Creek, now, as I think I indicated last month or the month before, is in that I will call an extended hearing i 5 ] process or will be in an extended process. There are quite, f 1 l 0 a few intervenors, lots of contentions. We are showing, : rom 1 7 last month's prediction an additional two-month delay. The delay l 8 is, in effect, because of the extended hearing, but in fact, u 9 0 also relates to our difficulty in getting the SER completed and { j 10 ! getting ready:to get in to the hearing.. f .43 As'we now foresee it, our best shot is late January, 12 very early February'to complete the SER. In this case, the 13 ACRS is not reviewing this reactivated review. They have 14i reviewed Allens Creek before and declined to re-review it, 15 ;i consequently, when we publish an SER it has to be complete. It .i i 16 will have to have all of the outstanding issues completed as i 17 well as ALAB 444 matters, because the next step af ter the 15. publication of the SER is to get in to the hearing process. 19 (Slide) i 20f If I can turn now to the OL chart only one thing i 21 of-significance has changed. It relates to Zimmer. We anticipate 22 from previous assumptions about a five-month construction delay. 23 We still' are. targeting to.get.to the ACRS in February. Our SER is 24 in the printing process now. We would anticipate hopefully 25 getting on ~ to the hearing by April. It is a contested hearing. ..m--- ,., ~,, --~_,y- .--%.m.-

s i 10 Even so, with construction delayed until the end of the year, 2 I think that is adequate time. So there should not be any l P

[problemonZimmer.

L 4 ' (Slide) l '" h If I could turn to the standardization on the design u 6 approvals.the top.two charts show a two-nonth deley. We have O } '[ two technical problems with the SWESSAR/BSAR application, I along with some work on the generic issues. They are in.the 8 4 I 9 l process of being resolved, and we think that we should be able t 10, to get them resolved.and have the PDA out by February. it i 11 j The BOPSSAR/BSAR, we are targeting to go to.the ACRS o ? .a'j in February. The SER, as I understand it is now being prepared j 13 in. final. It will need to be out by the end of.this month in 14 order to make the February ACRS meeting, so it looks like it is 15.i. on track. 16 Toward the bottom of the chart --- i 17 h CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Do I read it, it looks like Stone l 1 13 1 and Nebster is going to have a full plant with a B&W reactor l 19 in it before B&W has got a reactor PDA. ii 20

MR. DOYD:

No, no. This is -- B&W already has its 21 PDA. That was a 'few months ago. This BOPSSAR is another 22 another balance of~ plant. 23 CHAIRMAN HENDRIS: I see, I see. Okay. 14 MR. LOYD: Which one is BOPSSAR? 25' MR. VASSALLO: Flour Pioneer.

11 MR. BOYD: Flour Pioneer. It is the only one that

  • i 2 j you can' t divine who the author is by looking at the euphemism.

t 3 3 The three down toward the middle of that mark are Ebasco - : 4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: What's wrong with tha't FPSSAR or --- 5 (Laughter) 6 0 COMMISSIONER'AHEARNE: I think probably you are 1 e i 7'! proceeding the limits of the acronym. j i l 8 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Is this ex parte or simply that .9 my teeth don't fit. Probably the latter. 10'O All right, onward. 9 11 ' Now, what about the OPS thing? You were about to be ll 12 ) there, right? i 13 ' MR. BOYD: On OPS? 14 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes. { 13 MR..BOYD: The situation on OPS is that we hava put i 16 l together with the utility or the applicant, the boundaries of l i i 17 our extended review or our.re-review of the application. They 18 .are supplying information relating to that, I believe the end 19. ; of this month, first of next month, and so we will complete 20 ' that part of the review. 'i 21 The matter of Class 9 is still pending and --- l 22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: When do you expect to get the SER 23 supplement set?' MR.'BOYD: If the information comes in that we are 4

g anticipating on schedule, we should be able to get the SER A'

t

12 supplement at least relating to those matters, some of the i 2 Category 3 matters, some of the Category 2 matters. Most of 3 this will be delayed until the operating review, so it will essentially be the Category 3 matters. I *tould say sometiae in 5 ij the spring. Until we see them, we haven't got a firm schedule i 6 1 for that. r 7 MR. DENTON: We have the ACRS showing in December. i 2 j Is that correct? That event? 9 MR. BOYD: No, I don't believe we are going in 10 December. We didn't. That looks like probably an error in the 11 preparation of the charts. 12 MR. DENTON: The FES is still scheduled for December, 13 late this month. And we have three months to reach the resolution: 14 on how to handle the Category 2s and 3s project. .5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Let's see, the FES, that will be 16. the last part of the FES, presumably. i o 17 MR. DENTON: Yes. 15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: And if you can now get the SER supplement pulled together, that will wrap up the safety side 20 review and you can get on with the hearing. 21.i This thing has been dragging an enormously long time 2; and it would be highly desirable to get it on to a decision. 23 I guess the way in which the Class 9 related things in this case affect the manuf acturing license is something that we will 25 thrush out down the line as we look at it. I guess my own

13 ~. impression is that the more interesting questions in that area 2 are of a more generic character than-this one, but maybe that is 2,, ~ getting as far or.maybe even further than one ought to comment 3 4 on the mat er before the Commission. ] - Other items'here? j i 6 h MR. BOYD: Yes. d:. The Ebasco ESSARs, I had indicated a' month or two j 7 l i 8 l ago that the schedules on these were essentially open. We knew l 'l 9 there was going to be ' dae necessity for a revised schedule, i 12 ! considering all the workload inputs, we finally have schedules 11 h on all three of these reviews and with' the PDAs in the vicinity ) 12 ] of '80, that is effectively a six-months slip in the review. i 13 j So these three plants, as a matter of priority, have been delayed ', \\ s 14 l' in our schedule.six months. ] CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Actually there are three parts to 13'j; 16 l the thing. I i 1 17 : MR. BOYD: Yes. j q CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Now, of the'six '80, those things, 13 j,, 19 i are they all' filed now? 20 MR. BOYD: They are all filed. l l 21 ; CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: And how long have they been in-house? MR. BOYD: They were --- 2; MR. DENTON: A pretty long tim. ome of them. We 33 24 had several meetings with that applic I had said I just couldn't give priority to this over. us. There were some 25. ,,y,. +. ~

14 1 parts of the review that we couldn' t undertake, but we looked y' at the complications of getting.one or two branches going and l [' not' having the other branches ', so it wasn't the best arrangement, ' 3. li" 'but I think we did. set a schedule that makes sense in terms 4 5 of our priorities and doesn' t bother them too much. MR. BOYD: The first one must have come in about s'ix h 6 T i 7 months ago, according to the date on it. I l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: ' Won't by six '80 --- 8 n r 9 j MR ' -BOYD: Eight 80. ig l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: -- which is two years from now, all of the NSSS PDAs will be just about to decay. I _3 1, 'j 11 MR. BOYD: Not quite. BSAR-205 just got a PDA. 12h RESAR-414 just'got a five-year PDA last month. That's true on ~ ~., the CESSAR which is in the process of getting a two-year y4 I extension, and by that period, that one will have about decayed. l _a, CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: And you will look then, in connection 16 i with the CESSAR --- 37 ~ g ?, MR. BOYD: 'FDA at that time. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: -- and you will also pick up the 3e ~0 j FDA? I 9 e l 'l MR.-BOYD: The CESSAR FDA review will ultimately impact 21 what the f staff does on the so-called ESSAR/CESSAR. 22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Okay, onward. y (Slide) MR.'BOYD: The next chart, down about four charts m w -~v-- re e- ,.~s-e r -v w.r-,n -,se w g.w--,- v-- .,.g g -e

15 where we talk about schedule accomplishments. I think I l 2 l ,j mentioned the top two last month as either had happened or were i i n about.to happen at'the time we had the briefing. j We did issue a PDA on RESAR 414, back on the 14th

5. jj of November and two construction permits for the Yellow Creek l

~ 6 J { T plants. They were issued on November 22nd, which I think was l 7 Il on or about the time that we had last month's briefing. In the i j

meantime, as you can see in the chart we managed to publish 9

1 the FES on LaSalle, the SER supplement on Diablo Canyon and the 10 Draft Environmental Statement on San Onofre. I 11 N f i The only -- in categorizing the schedule slips. 0 ~2 1 i think I have gone through them all. j l 1t The last thing I have, I think of any significance in ~~ 1-I l our scheduled licensing action charts, last month I pointed out ~' a we scratched New England for FISCAL '79 predictions. With the j 16 i construction delay in Zimmer, as you can see, we have now drawn 5 ^7 " 1 a line through Zimmer. So so far in our FISCAL '79 projections 'we have dropped two plants. In the meantime, we also have 4 3e two of ~ the cps out, namely Yellow Creek and RESAR-414, one of the ~' three PDAs. 2~1 ' On. balance, we are slightly ahead of predictions at l I ne - this point.: That's all I have in the briefing unless there ~~ are-any questions. COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: -When you say ahead of ~ ' predictions, do you mean the permits will be issued slightly w--

f 16 ahead of what you had been projecting, taken as a whole? 2 j MR. BOYD: No. I mean that we have gotten more out 3 i than have dropped of f the bottom of the FISCAL chart. In fact, t i' t 6, we have three items issued and only two items have dropped out. i 3 l Eventually, by year's end, more will have been completed and core 6 .-will have dropped off until exactly at the end of the year l 7 l. they just come together. So however those two curves merge, at l l this point we are still slightly ahead of the game. 8 i 4 e n 0, COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Now, let's see, does that 9 10 mean that if you had projected -- issued 50 at the beginning of i i 11 !l the year and 24 had dropped off and 26 were. issued, you would { 12 consider yourselves to have finished ahead of the game? j .i 13 MR. BOYD: No. It is strictly a rate consideration. 14 As long as more things are accomplished than drop off 15-in to FISCAL '80, from a rate point of view I see us as being ,i 16 J ahead of schedule, as it were. As more things drop off than j' i 17 ', are accomplished, then if you were plotting them the chart would 18 flip the other way and 'you'd be ef fectively overall behind l; 19{!. schedule. CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: It sort of depends on how far they 20 1 21 D drop, isn' t that right? 22 MR. BOYD: No, all they have to do is October or later. 23 If you can' t make 'it by the end of September, they drop out of FISCAL '79 into oblivion, as far as this chart is concerned. ' CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Comments? 23 + .~

i 17 1 MR. YORE: I've got some good news. 'i 2 J Diablo, there were no disruptive activities at 3 Diablo, the~ hearing. Carl Kammerer was there for the first 4 h part of.the hearing --- l (Laughter) l 5 4 6 d -- they were about ready to make him the official I bodyguard if they ran into any trouble. So that went off without 7 8 any -- there were about 200 limited appearances, but no j h 9 disruptive activity. The Board did something, I think, was a j u 10j; good idea. The original room was not large enough, so they got i 11 I closed-circuit television for another room and this seemed to I t 4 12 work out very well so the people could see everything. 12 j The Board decided not to subpoena the ACRS consultants, i r 14 j so that will be appealed. I won't talk about it any more because 15 you may be getting that. l

16Y, The hearing is going on.this week, it's the third week I

i 17 ll and we will have to go back in January for the seismic problem. M i 16 i;l. The other point that I think is good news is that the l 19 d Trojan Board finished their hearing on the limited license for 1 20 Trojan. They should have a decision out in a week or two.

Now, p

21 'j they will have to go back for the other -- the full-term operating - ; d 22 it's not an operating license, but a special license that controls 23 them. 24 If I could take a minute of your time, I ran down the 23 Special Proceedings and we have 10 proceedings that are waste i ,-en

1 18 $h e 1 related. Seven of these are for enlargement of spent fuel 2 storage pools and two are in transportation. One has to do l

. with the' low-level waste' disposal site, that's the one out 3

y i 't 4 in Sheffield, Illinois. i' 5-But the interesting thing, I think is and I don't l 6 ll have ---- 7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Let's see, what's the Sheffield one? l j; t 8~ MR. YORE: Low-level waste disposal, burial ground in 9 h Illinois. i 9 i a 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Is it on the expansion or the --- 11 j MR. YORE: I think it is both. 12 MR. DENTON: There is nothing being buried there right 13 'j now, so it must be expansion. 14 d CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, that's also where we are u 4 15 j! trying to retread the materials license. It is one of those 16 0 that has been, just continued in force under the automatic 17 " -extension provisions of the law. is - MR. YORE: But anyhow, these l'0 proceedings, Special 19 Proceedings, four are in Illinois and three are in Wisconsin. 20 -! So seven 'out of the ten -- why this happens, I don't know, but ---i 1 21 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: If we continue to have patterns like 22 that,.I'm going to suggest that the Commission lease a couple of 23 railroad-cars and we could fit them up and just send a group of the Boards out to 'that part of the country and have lodging, i j-save per diem, a messhall car --- ll

t 4 19 MR. YORE : I think you might get some static out of i 2 tha t. i 4 ' CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: -- hearing car --- 4 MR. YORE: Well, if it is one of these fancy parlor 1 h cars, they might --- I-5 dl i l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: But the advantage of a railroad 6 I 7 j hearing room is if you perceive an unruly group approaching, 8 I why --- J i 9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Joe, there has been enough j 10.i concerns raised about how we railroad some of the hearings. l 11 d (Laughter) d~; MR. YORE: No, I think it is better to have Carl i 12 a 12 ] Kammerer in this outfit. 14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Jim, could I ask you a question? 15,j I'm sure that in the past or I assume at some time d in the past that there have been hearing boards where a member 16 I 17 of the board had to be replaced, dropped out for one reason or l 18, ano ther. i 19 MR. YORE: Sure. I 20 d COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: What is the' procedure? Does

i l

21 " that cause the hearing to ha"e to be repeated or --- .1' 22 MR. YORE: No, no. 23

For good cause, if somebody has to leave,it might be 4;

. sickness' or whatever it is, we have the right to change the 33 board and in' the Seabrook decision, the Court of Appeals, I think, / -i.,, w e,

20 t i ~ fin'the First Circuit, said that was legal. l 2 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: It is not necessarily tidy. 3Y q MR. YORE: No. We don't encourage it. t MR. KELLEY: I believe on the f acts of that case i o Daniel Head then got another job, right? And that is a 6 pretty good reason to get another person, I think. I l 7 There are some cautionary notes, though, in that 8 regard, for example, I was talking to' Steve Eilperin about this 9 i point and his feeling was that if a person goes on a board, he } ^O I " ought to have at the beginning the expectation at the i O 11 ! l ~ ^ il approach --- 19 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Is that a legal requirement or --- ^~ ll ^3~ 1 h MR. KELLEY: I think it may be, because the argument j 14 0 would be, I'm entitled to a board that is going to hear the whole l . g: 10 F I thing and decide it, Land here somebody has been put in there l h lj for a few months and took of f and they knew he could never l 17 0 finish it. Anyway, I didn't get the guality of the decision l 18 7,m entitled to.- I can hear that. -19 o COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Could you perhaps explore that j 20.- i for Friday? 21 MR. KELLEY: 'Yes. oc At the very latest, Steve can come and we can give you a copy of.the relevant parts. 04 But also, a person could be -- in the case of 2E Commissioner Gilinsky who is thinking about this, a person could- .e-.-- y>, .-.f .p_ ,v.,-, g----,we grw.--..--- y mr

I 21 also be a Board member by being put on the panel, at some later l date, should that become necessary. 2 l t 2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIB: Other comments? Additions to the o 'I discussion here? Complaints? 5 COMMISSIONER AHEARME: On this subject? 6 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: We are not going to ask for complaints, 7 'in general. There is a box in the hall. i 8 Thank you_very much. l (Whereupon, the Commission was adjourned at 11:10 a.m.) 9 .l 2 0 il i 11 i i 12 l 13 ' 1 4 !!'l i lf i 16,l l a 1-Il I 17 1 i 13 3 o il t y' se 20 l1l I I o La -t 2 S1 5 9, w T e e

0\\, 6(\\G Ob Yk 50 December 14, 1978 SECY-78-66l \\M(*7 UNITED STATES 4 NUCLEAR REGULATORY c0MMtssl0N Y INFORMATION REPORT For: The Comissioners From: Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Thru: Executive Director for Operations-y,y

Subject:

REACTOR LICENSING SCHEDULES -- DECEMBER 1978 PROJECTION The December 1978 projection on the status of power reactor licensing schedules is enclosed for the information of the Comission. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

1. Schedule Charts 2. Accomplishment / Slip Charts 3. FY 79 Charts 4. Pending Cases Table DISTRIBUTION: Comis sioners Comission Staff Offices Exec. Dir. for Opers. SECY NOTE: This paper is presently Regional Offices scheduled for discussion Secretariat on Thursday, December 21, 1 ACRS Regional Offices CONTACT: Roger S. Scyd, DPM 492-7595

t DECEMBER,1978 LICENSING PROJECTIONS-CP&LWA LWNS: CP'S: $ $ ? 5' ~5h $ * & 5] ? $ l k /$ k% f$ /$ f h l 9f %/ h k / N NM M ~ JAMESPORT 162 7 3R8 su 313 18 / cp ' cp Awaiting AStB % / 18.8 +1 / 22.9 582 +35323 / 1 Respenedheming min / 2ns PERKINS 1-3 / 20.4 2 _ 14.8 CP CP January 22. ERIE 1 & 2 s7ng 11 8 11'/ 1188 58 53/ H* CP Apfrant revising projectscheMe. 323 26.0 20.4 40 /8 20.1 +8 /8 LWA PEBBLE / ERE 31.s 25.9 / SPRINGS 1 h 2 / is.s +7 /s -H* Altemate site infamatina tageted I CP g, j,,,,y, SKAGIT 1 & 2 .BR5 11 3.s/ siis 25 6 25.6 / LWA cp Combinedhering to reconvene 12.8

  • 1 /75 19.8

+7 /0 d PILGRIM 2 LWA REQUESTED 1BRS/iG BR5 425 30'I / H* leBowing seisinic impact resolujen. 663 CP CP Altersate site review delay. BLACK FOX 182-LWA-1 ISSUED 7R698 I Hs* CP-- CP Extended hering. 391 193 +2 DAVIS LWA-1 ISSUED 12/31DS 4RS 56.1 34 3 36 5 ' Hs Applicant and Staff May in BESSE 2 h 3 Its

  • 2 /0 CP-CP positions.

Extendedheming process. p/ $ ss'8 + i' )/

  1. 3 AlLENS CREEK 1 SER H*

CP CP 8H7 41.4 21 s s.4/ p/ NRCputsijointhrg.expectedtostat GREENE COUNTY ,,y gp. 02R1 19.8 +0 / 15.2 He 1&2 p/ NEWENGLAND DSRS 93 83 / N* DES delayed by alternate site revew. i 413 +0 /0 PDD 02/80. 31.1 PALO VERDE 48 5 / 12!L9 8 8/ Accelerated review.PDD12R9. 20 5 /, 20.5 +0 /0 "5 H5 i

P I E d 8 'E ~ s 5 8 gif 5 N j d ~ E l f ] 'l .5 h f *s l. si 5 cc .e 1 m a J! 'e .E .8 'g h g. 3 .E 5 g 9 } s .g. pe s s__i 3 3 im I a m D E c:s a l 5 l m a 1 lm C::D s i l w l m W e o e m ag a 8 8 5 8 E E c.o=

m. s
m. i mg=N%%

a 11j! m m m m m m i in s m s gs i e s s s e =. a m i s i a in s s a mi s es s_ a n n_ s_ , i s m .131X'45NNNKN'RNNXX M'N E s_i,,i, 2_ =_ =_. n_ _m_,m _ =.._m.-.._ ;_ =._ =_ . m. m. i, m jgg d E O N s"o E E N M N ~m $ E h E! E ! E! EN E ! E !E h E ! I ! h C ~ ~ I w c== N e a m g = w m cx E g N 3 e E E W E E5 "5 = m m a a m m

DECEMBER,1978 LICENSING PROJECTIONS - DESIGN APPROVALS s#55]? [kd((8d[ddhMhd/dk REMARKS PROJECT SWESSAR/BSAR-12 m l AMW reswelsedadagismes. PDA PDA 3,3 p,g __. m Resw of senaicismes. BOPSSAR/BSAR sins 1 PDA PDA - 205 143 153 +8 PDA - Acas 11ns; PDD st/sa. GIBBSSAR/RESAR a2ns +32.2 pgg au -414 2s.s s a w 4 w w simee a m n % FNP 1-3 esas 353 g*,m ,t 7 23 5 +7 ML ESSAR/CESSAR a2/so 12 PDA PDA 08/B0. Revised schedule te reflect piority. 3g, 12.4 -+ E PDA 08/80. Revised schedule to reRect piarity. ESSAR/BSAR-205 n2/no 2s.s 8 pog 20.9 +E PDA M. RM M to renect @y. ESSAR/RESAR-414 02/so 12 pgg 2s.1 PBA10/80. GAISSAR 10/80 8 PDA 25.4 25.4 +O IDA CESSAR SYSTEM N/S 80 4

O E -2 555Nll GEE il-~~~ gssss sig

s gU

^ i.ls llE55555ll@ en !UEEE g! UE l[!!$sjj!!s

=

!!s s 6 !ils.I ! EEE!!!!!! iggggs l'g gg i ~ 2 iii ! li1555555555 =. u-g m ~Eg~ TE 3 g3 4 i a ig

  • i i;gi-II:

m ij5h

!G 8

a ?ji isl ' sis!IERI itsla! i I! c <e .r b !!!!55 iib ljgggg c fiss u a==~

s222 jings j=gggg gggg gg

.t 1 Idssi i *=t suss iss g !j. i i lElisimilis la" SE! !!!85E i'!EE5!:liu isssus !!il Eli i aes5 al w :: u .E35s5EEEE lil W ijgsg s 1

i

a r.;s= n a e i;! g, = o f"~:: ec ~- ,l ~g~_ *gg j 1.g;g sin g i c2-l 5 5 _Egaalsi=Rai fig l g i h'l5 u s c.c m an u _*aH z ' Egg j = = c4 b p a rf M j I C =l,!.E5i155 3!!"** !! E55 i uit E: u1

== r- =as, Q"J 9 !) $,d C 5115s c.!}'"aEE=h itssus ,iijis3 !$$$55b d ! g = m

s o-

==liiE_,m...2 mat vs t. = p; 5 w llii! lEi! cz: =. a-y = y ; ~E ! _ bi!!5,, n ll al wm, e = r e wc E =3~ssgl:- - nsas e _a = s!

ss E =e== m ass

== e

i DECEMBER,1978 LICENSING PROJECTIONS -

SUMMARY

NOVEMBER ISSUANCES DL'S LWA'S NONE NONE CP'S PDA'S YELLOWCREEK1 &2-ISSUED 11/29H8 HESAllJI14 -ISSUED 11/14R8 1 FY 79

SUMMARY

CY78

SUMMARY

2. .iG. i.h 3: 2. .!E ri:: 3: CP'S: 1202) 11(20) 11(20) 1(2) CF'S: 1601) 6(13) Ell 3) Ell 3) LWWS: 36) 36) 36) O(0) LWNS: 6(12) 3(6) 2(4) 214) DL'S: 1 1 6 g DL*S: 10 3 3 3 PDfS: 3 3 3 1 PDA'S: 3 3 2 2 KEY Hs - SCHEDULED SAEEIY HEARING H. He. Hs - HEARINGS NDI YET SCHEDULED BY ASLB

  • - CDNIESTED HEARING g - StilEDULED ENVIRONMENTAL HEARING V - REACTIVATED REVIEW H - SCHEDULED CDMBINED HEARING

t SCllEDULE ACCOMPLISilMENTS IN NOVEMBER 1978 RESAR 414 PDA ISSUED NOVEMBER 14 YELLOW CREEK 182 CP ISSUED NOVEMBER 22 LASALLE 1&2 FES ISSUED NOVEMBER 8 RESAR 414 SER ISSUED NOVEMBER 13 DIABLO CANYON 182 SER SUPPLEMENT 8 ISSUED NOVEMBER 15 SAN ONOFRE 2&3 DES ISSUED NOVEMBER 28 4 4 i -- sm m----

e- --

i SCllEDULE SLIPS IN NOVEMBER 1978 EA PILcRIM 2 11 MONTHS ALTERNATE SITE REVIEW CP'S JAMESPORT 1&2 1 McNTH AWAITING ASLB DECISION PERxlNS 1-3 2 MONTHS llEARING TO BE REOPENED ON ALTERNATE SITES PILGRIM 2 11 MONTHS ALTERNATE SITE REVIEW BLACK F0x 1&2 2 MONTHS EXTENDED lIEARING DAVIS BESSE 2&3 2 MONTHS APPLICANT & STAFF DELAY IN POSITIONS ALLENS CREEK 1 2 MONTHS DELAY IN llEARING START DL'S ZIMMER 5 MONTHS DELAY IN COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION PDA'S SWESSAR/BSAR-205 2 MONTHS ADDITIONAL REVIEW OF OUTSTANDING ISSUES l B0PSSAR/BSAR-205 2 MONTHS REVIEW OF 6ENERIC ISSUES ESSAR/CESSAR 6 MONTHS REVISED SCHEDULE TO REFLECT PRIORITY ESSAR/BSAR-205 6 MONTHS REVISED SCHEDULE TO REFLECT PRIORITY ESSAR/RESAR II.lft 6 MONTHS REVISED SCHEDULE TO REFLECT PRIORITY

l l l SCHEDULED LICENSING ACTIONS FY 1979 ~ LIMITED WORK AUTHORIZATIONS OPERATING LICENSES SKAGIT 182 MCGuIRE 1 PILGRIM 2 NORTH ANNA 2 ERIE 182 SEQUOYAH 1 hmER GwSTRuCTION DELAY INITIAL FY 79 PROJECTION 3 (5) DIABLO CANYON 1 CURRENT FY 79 PROJECTION 3 (5) SALEM 2 DIABLO CANYON 2 CONSTRUCTION PERMITS ^ YELLOW CREEK 182 (C) CURRENT FY 79 PROJECTION 6 JAMESPORT 1&2 PERKINS 1-3 PEBBLE SPRINGS 1&2 PDA'S SKAGIT 182 SWESSAR/BSAR-205 B0P PILGRIM 2 - RESAR-414 NSSS (C) BLACK FOX 182 B0PSSAR/BSAR-205 B0P DAVIS BESSE 283 ALLENS CREEK 1 INITIAL FY 79 PROJECTION 3 [_RIE 182 CURRENT FY 79 PROJECTION 3 GREENE COUNTY New ENGLAND-l&2 ALT SITE STUDIES INITIAL FY 79 PROJECTION 12 (22) CURRENT FY 79 PROJECTION 11 (20)

NEW APPLICATION FORECAST - FY 1979 CONSTRUCTION PERMITS 3 EARLY SITE REVIEWS 10 GREENWOOD 283 TVA-1 4 NEW llAVEN 182 (C) FuLToN CENTRAL-VIRGINEA-lE2 DELAYED SUMMIT INDIANA 182 CARROLL COUNTY STUYVESANT OPERATING LICENSES 5 GCFR DEMO PERRY 182 NEW MEXICO CLINTON 182 WASHINCION MARBLE IIILL 182 BALTIMORE BEAVER VALLEY 2 TVA-2 CALLAWAY 182 SPECIAL REVIEWS 4 STANDARD PLANTS 4 LMFBR VARIENT (C) GIBBSSAR-BSAR 205 B0P PDA PWR THORIUM CORE (C) CESSAR SYSTEM 80 NSSS FDA (c) AIN ADVANCED CORE MOD GIBBSSAR-CESSAR 30P PDA LMFBR VARIENT 38R-RESAR-414 B0P PDA TOTAL APPLICATIONS 26 1

(. CASES PENDING BEFORE THE COMMISSION, APPEAL SCARDS AND LICENSING BGARDS SER/ACRS FES ASLB BOARD ASLAB 30ARD IAtilllY SW. (Doctet No. & Vendor) ISSUED ASLB* HCMBERS ASLAB* MEPSERS COMMISSION" HEARING STATJS 155UEQ 2 Construction Permit o 3 4 Y $N e'Rhil~ew: Intervention period reope 53 :>ased on Allens Creek, Units 1 SER Yes X Wol f e, E hd innan change from 2 units to I. 9ver 30 inter- &2 11/74 11/14 Brignt, Cheatum vention petitions filed. : rehearing con-l (50-466/467) Supp. ference held 11/17/78. (GE) 6/75 i A Atlantic Generating SER X Wolfe, Chairman Because applicant is not pursuing applicar Station 7/77 no Scnink, Kornblith tion Staf f review indefiritely suspended (50-477/478) (West) A Barton, Units 1 & 2 No No X Smith, Chairman re motion to Hearing process suspended for indefinite (50-524/525) Mann, Salo consolidate period because applicant has suspended 8 (CE) with Farley on construction plans. l* antitrust Black fox. Units 1 6/77 LWA issued 7/26/78. Safety hearings coia-l & 2 (CP) SER Yes X Wolfe, Chairman X Salzman, Chairman menced 10/10/78, ended 10/20/78. 2-4 l (SIN 50-555/556) Supp. 2/77 Purdom, Shon Sharfman, Johnson more weeks of safety hearings anticipated I (GE) 9/78 12/78 and 1/79. Early Blue Hills, Units 1 Site Yes X Miller, Chairman Early site review hearing requested 7/78 Kornblith, Little by Applicant. Evidentiary hearing not yet &2 R) Revie" R t sc heduled. No intervention. j (50-510/511) (Conb.) 'Cherotee, Units 1-3 Chairman not yet CP issued. Appeal Board has approved 3 dPP inled X Rosenthal, Chrm. Initial Decision except for radon issue (STN 50-491/492/493) Supp 10/75 d*S I'd* J rdan Salzman, Buck which is still before the ASLB. (Cuab.) 7/7f Y Clinch River (suspend-ed) No No X Miller, Chainnan tiearing indefinitely suspe<ded at request l 50-537) Linenberger, Iland of Applicant. l l W"_5_t{ - India.ates lacfore which tribunal (s) the case is currently pending.

r L CASES PENDING BEFORE THE COMMISSION, APPEAL BOARDS AND LICENSING BOARDS 't IAtlLilY SER/ACR5 FES ASLB BOARD ASLAB BOARD P ISSUED ASLB* MEfEERS ASLAB* MEMBERS COMMISSION

  • PEARING STATUS 3(Docket No. & Vendor)

I IConstruction Permit l br tarly Site RevFew: Davis-Besse. Units 2 SER Tes X Luton, Chairman X Rosenthal, Chrm. tWA-l and LL'?-I 'isued. & 3 (CP) 7/78 3/73 Hand Hetrick Salzman, Sharfman (50-500/501) No Supp. (B&W) yet 3 SER Bowers, Chairman Douglas Point. Units 1 &2 (ESR) yes 'X Lazo Alt. Chre. Both units inden_nitely :sterred. Early tSS"*d 85 S Bright, Cole Site Review hearing tentatively sche 4 (50-448/449) ! * "rt 3/76 Jordan Alt. uled to begin af ter 2/79. (GE) k S/76 l Erie. Units 1 & 2 (CP) SER Contested hearing will tcgin in 1979. (50-580/581) 7/78 (B&W) 40 supp. No X Bowers Chairman yet. Cowan, Shon Fort Calhoun, Unit 2 Applicant may request Early Site (50-548) No Yes X Lazo, Chrm Review. (West) 3/78 Luebke, Stober [ulton, Units 1 & 2 SER Applicant expected to re:;est Early (50-463/464) 3/75 Yes X Clark, Chrm. Site Review. (No vendor) Supp. 4/75 deSylva Linenberger 7/75 Callihan, Alt. SER Greene County (CP) No X Goodhope, Chnn. Environmental hearing ir. orogress tiefore 9/77 Ferguson, Cole the ASLB and the State. Preparation underway (50-549) for safety hearing expected to begin in (ggy) February 1979. Contested hearing. Prefect in ' hold" Greenwood Units 2 & 3 SER yes X Bowers Chrm. status due to applicant postponement. No (50-452-453) 7/74 yjfy4 (B&)l) Cole, Jordan hearing dates scheduled t Iwitcates before which tribunal (s) the case is currently pending. 4 ~

t t CASES PENDING BEFORE THE C0fellSS10N. APPEAL B07dlDS AND LICENSING BOARDS ASLAB*l; ~ fat!LIiY SEh/ACRS FES-ASLB BOARG ASLAB BOARD MEMiERS C0ffilSSION* HEARING STATUS

(Docket.No. ' & Vendor)

ISSUE 0 ASLB* MEleERS Construction Permit 4

o W ir F $ite Review:

cp.s issued. Before ASLAB on radon i .j issue and endangered species issue. ) -lHartsville. Units i SER Yes X dolfe. Chairman X Rosenthal, Chnn. e l &4 (CP) 4/16-6/75 Leeds. Remick Sharfman. Buck l

  • (SIN 50-518/519/520/

Supp. l-521) ~ 10/76 (gel j l Haven. Units 1 & 2 Contested hearing. Applicant amended ICP) No No X Luton, Chairman [SIM50-502/503) tright Cheatum application to withdraw one unit. ' ( No schedule for hearing. uWest). pe Creek. Units i SER &2 (CP) 12/11 Yes .X uton. Chairman X Sharfman. Chnn. Second Supp. Initial Decision issued 4 (50-354/355) Supp. 2/74 1111. Paris Joinson. Salzman 4/13/78. On appeal to ASLAB. (GE) 8/73 Jamesport. Units 1 SER s &2 (CP) 10/15 Yes X dolfe. Chairman X Sharfman, Chrm. PID issued 5/18. Before ASLB for issuance. (STN 50-516/517) Supp. 10/75 )ecker. Cheatum Johnson Salzman of SPID on radon. PID on appeal to ASLAB. (West) 4/76 brbleHill. Units 1 SER and 2 (CP) 7/77 Yes X Salzman, Chnn. X Initial Decision issued 4/78. Pending (STN 50-546/547) (includet 9/76 Farrar. Buck (on radon before ASLAB on border dispute issue and (West) ACRS ltr] issue) radon issue. Midland. Units 1 & 2 SER i (CP) Remand 11/70 Yes I Miller Chainnan X Commission remanded radon and disclosure (50-329/330) 3/72 Leeds. Lueble issues to ASLB for further hearings. Parties' l (B&W) views on Perkins record due 12/13/78. Entague. Units 1&2 SER (50-496/497) 7/78 Yes X Dechhoefer Chrm. Application in suspensionat request of r t (GE) No supp. 2/77 Decker. Holton Applicant. No hearing schedule. yet l*- j

  • -Indicates before which tritrunal(s) the case is currently pending.

i 1 m -v--

s CASES PENDING BEFORE THE COMt!SSION APPEAL BOARDS AND LICE':5ING BOARDS i s 'f SER/ACRS FES ASLB BOARD ASLAB BOARD FACllllY SUPP. (Docket No. & Vendor) 155i!EO ASLB* MEMBERS ASLAB* met 1BERS CortMISSION* HEARING STATUS 33U[0 L ' Construction Permit ' or Early Site Review. i NECO (Sheffield) No Ho I Goodhope. Chair 1 nan Contested hearing. No schedule has been (27-39) Little. Remick set for hearing. (not LWR) New England Power. SER Units 1 & 2 (CP) 6/78 No X 4 tiler. Chairman Contested hearing. No hearing dates (STN 50-368/369) No. supp. Luebke. Paris have been scheduled. (West) yet North Coast. Unit I No Yes X (ore. Chairman Applicant had requested Early Site Review. 4/II I'*I'* Linenberger No schedule has been set for hearing. (50-376) (West) SER Yes 10/75 X Jolfe. Chairman X Salzman. Chm. In hearing on both safety and environ-Offshore Power Systems 9/75 '(50-437) 9/76 Schink. Kornblith Farrar. Buck mental issues. (West) h{ tetrick. Alt. Come i Palo Verde. Units 4 ~aro. Chairman Requests for hearing pending before &5 No rio X _inenberger. Stober the ASLB. (STN 50-592/593) [ Intervention Board) (Cmb.) Pebble Springs. Units SER Yes X Ycre. Chairman in hearing before the AStB. 1&2 (CP) 1/76 4/75. Jordan. Hartin (50-514/515) Supp. + (B&W) 3f73 Perkins. Units 1-3 SER Yes X Bowers. Chaitican in hearing on both safety and environ-l [CP) 3/77 10/75 de5ylva, Jordon mental issues. PID issued 10/27/78. i , }', omb. )IN 50-488/489/490) Supp. { 7f77 Indicates I;efore which to it.unal(s) the case is currently pending.

CASES PENDluG BEFORE Tite C0tNIS$10!t, APPEAL BOARDS AND LICENS!hG BOARDS FAtiLIgy SER/ACRS FES ASLB BOARD ASLAB BOARD SUPP. ISSUED ASLB* MEMBELS ASLAB* MEMBERS C0tNISS10N* HEARING STATUS i i (Dodet No. & Vendor) ISSUE [L_ i Construction Pereit s ar Early Site Review: Ihipps Bend. Units 1 SER Yes Luton, Chairman X tosenthal, Chm. ASLAB affirmed Initial Decision; retained &2 4/77 2/77 Hill. Schink ialzman. Buck jurisdiction over radon issue. g (50-553/554) Supp. (GE) 9/77 ASLB bearing on radon, alternative SER sites and financial qualifications issues hilgrim. Unit 2(CP) 6/75 (50-471) Supp. Yes X Luton, Chairman X Salzman, Chrm. tentatively scheduled for early 1979. (Cumb.) 1/76 9/74 Callihan Cole Farrar. Buck [eabrook,UnitsI&2 SER Yes Smith, Chairman ASLAB conducting evidentiary hearing of (50-443/444) B/74 12/74 Salo Mann X Rosenthal Chrm. "9

  • I 55"***

(West) Su. farrar. Buck Shearon Harris, Units SER Yes X Smith. Chalman Rosenthal, Chrm. CP's issued; befbre ASLAB cn radon issue. 1-4 (CP) 12/72 5/73 Leeds, Bright Farrar. Buck Remanded to ASLB for hearing on capability of Applicant to construct and operate (50-40.0/401/40?/403) Supp. the facility. (West) 4/73 SER Yes Skagit. Units 1 & 2 (CP) 8/77 S/75 X Deale, Chrm. LWA-1 hearings in progress. (STN 50-422/423) Supp. Hooper, Linenberger (GE) 10/78 St. Lucie, Unit 2 (CP) SER Luton, Chairman CP issued. Before ASLAB on radon and grid (50-389) 11/74 Yes Hooper Hetrick X Farrar Chrm. X stability issues. (Comb.) Supp. 5/74 Salzman, Johnson 3/76 5terling SER Yes X Luton, Chairman X Rosenthal. Chna. CP granted. Befor e ASLAB on radon and (SIN 50-485) 9/75 6/76 Anderson, Kornblith Salzman. Buck need for power issues. (West) Supp. 4/76 Indicates tecfore which tril.unal(s) the case is currently pending.

CASES PENDif4G BEFORE THE COPetlSSION, APPEAL BOARDS AND LICENStrtG BOARDS SER/ACRS FES ASLB E0ARD ASLAB BOARD FACllllY 5 SUPP. ISSUED ASLB* HEMBERS ASLAB* HEMBERS COMMISSION

  • HEARING STATUS

-l (Docket No. & Vendor) ISSUED Construction Permit er Early Site TGRilew: Sundesert, Units 1 & 2 No No X Lazo, Chairman No hearirug dates scheduled. Appl ica-(CP) Cole. N nn tion in suspension. (50-562/533) (West) Tyrone (CP) SER Yes (Stra 50-4fs4) 10/75 4/77 X Smith, Chrm. X Salzman, Chrm. Before ASLB on issue remarded by the (West) Supp. Kornblith. Anderson Farrar, Johnson ASLAB. Before ASLAB on radon issue. 7/76 SER WPPSS, Unit 4 5/75 Yes Lazo. Chairman X Salzman, Chrm. CP issued 2/78. Pending before ASLAB on i (50-513) 3/75 deSylva. Hann Sharfman. Buck radon issue. (B&W) s Wolf Creek (CP) SER (STN 50-482) 9/75 Yes X Rosenthal, Chrm. Pending before ASLAB on radon issue. (West) Supp. 10/75 Farrar. Buck 1/76 Yellow Creek, thiits 1 SER & 2 (CP) 12//7 Yes-X Smith. Chairman X Rosenthal. Chrm. LWA issued. Pending before ASLB for (SIN 50-566/567) Supp. 11/77 Kornblith Paris Salzman, Buck decision on CP application. (Cmb. ) 6/78 l. I laticates befure which tr.lunal(s) the case is currently pending. a

CASES PLNDinG BEFORE Tite C0tNISS10N APPEAL 20ARDS AND LICENSING BOARDS SER/ACRS FACILili FES AS B CMRD ASLAB BMRD r(Docket No. & yerdor) S OED ISSUED ASLB* HEr$ERS ASLAB* HEMBERS C0tmlSS10N* HEARING STATUS {0pratingLicense: ? 6 SER Yes X Bowers Chatruan X Salzman, Chru. Safety i. earings commence 12/4/78. Security [Diablo Canyon, Units 10/74 5/73 Bright, Martin fluarles, Johnson issue request for certification pending l'(l&2 before ASLAB. 50-275/323) Supp. g(Wes t) expected 11/78 Ginna Unit I (fTOL) No Yes X Luton, Chaltuan No hearing to be scheduled until Staff (50-244) 12/73 Daiber, Luebke completes its SEP review. (West) Callihan, Alt. Indian Point, Unit i No No Jensch, Chainnan X Farrar Chru. X ALAB-400.najority opinion issued. (Seismic) Daiber Briggs ')uarles, Buck (Petition for Canission awaiting dissent by ASLAB (50-3) Review Pending) member, farrar. (B&W) Lacrosse (FTOL) No No X Eechhoefer Chrm. Contested hearing. Hearing scheduled ,(50-409) Anderson, becker - to be established af ter conpletion of (AC) SEP review (1980). M SER Yes X Lazo, Chairman Pending before the ASLB for issuance f(cGuire, Units 1&2 50-369/370) 3/18 4/76 ~ Hand, Luebke of Initial Deci9.i. (West) Supp. l - 11 8 5 Midlard, Units 1 & 2 No No X Smith, Chairman Prehearing scheduled 12/14-12/15/78. (50-129/330) Cowan, Kornblith (8&W) ~~ Conversion to FTOL. ASLB has dismissed all Monticello, Unit 1 SER Yes X Lazo, Chairman issues except ATWS. Briefs of parties on (FIOL) (50-263) 2/73 11/72 Jordan, Cole ATWS due 1/5/79. (GE) , included TRS ltr) Indicates before which tribunal (s) the case is currently pending. - - - - - ~ ' - - - - - -

CASES PENN NG BEFORE THE LOMMISS10'4, APPEAL BOARDS AND LICENSING BOARDS fl.LILIIY 3"/ fES l ASLB COARD ASLAB BOARD (Docket No. & Vendor) IS E3 ISSUED ASLB* MEMBERS ASLAB' MEMBERS COMMISSION

  • HEARING STATUS Operating License:

North Anna Units SER Yes Coufal, Chairman X Rosenthal. Chrm. X OL issued. Pending before ASLAB for 1&2 6/76 Purdom. Briggs Salzman, Buck review of missile impacts and pump .(S0-338/339) Supp. house settlement issues. Balance of '(West) 8/77 case decision pending before the Corn-12/77 mission. Oyster Creek, Unit i SER Yes X Lazo, Chalman Motion to tenalnate proceeding pending (50-219) 12/68 12/74 Turbridy, Alt. Ch:1n, before ASLb. (GE) Paxton, Purdan Shon, Alt. Peach Bottua. Units SER Yes None X Farrar. Chrm. Pending tefore ASLAB for review of 2&3 8/72 4/73 Buck, Johnson ASLB Initial Decision and radon issue. 50-271/2/8) CE) Ro inson, Unit 2 N.A. Yes Wolfe, Chairman X Farrar. Chrm. Pending before ASLB for issuance of (Section B) 4/75 Callihan, Cole - Salznan, Johnson-Initial Decision. Review of PID by ASLAB (50-261) stayed pending rerdition of Initial Decision (West) on amendment proceedity on increased pwr. level San Onofre, Units SER No X Smith, Chairman Contested hearing. No hearing dates 2&3 expected Hand, Kornblith scheduled. (50-361/362) 11/78 icuabl Shoreham SER Yes X Bowers, Chairman Contested hearing. No hearings dates (50-322) expected 12/77 Paris Shon scheduled. (GE) I?/78 Summer, Unit i No Yes X Smith, Chainnan Contested hearing. No hearing dates (50-395) 10/77 Hooper, Linenberger sc hedu'ed. (West) Indicates before which trit,unal(s) the case is currently pending. 1 1

i l

5 i

i i j t! l!I l ~ -ce t o e r t p a n d o t ^ S f' g g U a n n T r i i A c r l T r a u i e r S a h G r N n o o I o N f.g RA B Bn E L Li H S g Sr A n Aa i e e-r eh r a r o e or f h f o ee ef b u dd b s ee s gs tl gt ni su ns ed ie i dn t e du no nh nq S ei oc ee D Pt C s P r' RAO B

  • N G

O N I I S S S N I E M C P I O L C DN A n . a S mm D D rf R R hr A AS C a O OR h B BE ,S l BN a. LA AE h n t o E LM P S ns en P A sh A oo RJ N O I S B S A X I L M S M A O C g E n t i i r T e n d D ng a n E R ar r m e p R AS me e r O 0R rb p i i n o a y I CE o hl l E B ae i Cl t D BM hn l n LE Ci .i e H G SM ,L N A t s r I n. h r. r D oo g ee u wl c N tl i E ua r oo P LS B BC s i SE e S B s A .L X X a C S c A e t h l. t t 6 7 E s7 s7 ) SU e/ e/ o s ES Y2 Y6 N ( FS 1 l I anu d b D 6 p7 8 e8 ir R7 p77 Rt7 M E/u// Ec/ o t S9S32 $e9 N S p h ~ I x c e i h )r w o e dn e d r e s n o f t V n a e. t e l I i & c s 2 i i I t L L i t) s IC o e n iL e A N g l U nO t n i ) ) U - a F t i M 0 8 7~ c e t 22' r5 ,9 k a e 3) e3 S3 i d c r et - W m - )E P0E t S -) r i o e ri0& a0 5G P5G D p hn5B i ( O TU(( Z(( W(( iI l. ,7 i ,1 j! i4

1 L CASES PENDING BEFORE THE C0tMI5510N, APPEAL BOARDS AND LICENSING BOARDS .. _ _ ~ 'FACILilf SER/ACR$ FE5 ASLB BOARD -ASLAB BOARD-(Dod et No... & '! encor) y[y ISSUED ASLB* NENBERS. ALLAB* NENBERS C0tMI5510.*l* HEARING STATUS ~; Lisense Amendment: - Hund,oldt Bay '(deletion . No No ' Luton, Chrm. Contested hearing, No hearing dates. f l of seismic conditions) Linenberger Schink scheduled. (Intervention Board) ,g. .j(GE) (50-133) Indian Point. Unit 2 Scharfman; Chru.' X Commission has requested briefs on EPA-NRC l (Cooling Tower) n.A. Yes Dalber, Briggs Buck, Quarles interrelationship as relates to MRC license (50-247) 8/76 condition.. Briefs due 12/15/78, repiles due (West) 1/12/78. Kewaunee (SFP) ((A (50-305) No No X Lazo, Chrm. Cortested hearing. No heariq dat? (West) Bright, Paris scheduled. 3 Lacrosse (SFP) No EIA X Bechhoefer, Chrm. Cnntested hearing. No' hearing dates (50-409) No Anderson, Decker wheduled. SER/EIA publication 12/1/78. ( AC) Point Beach, Units 1 EIA &2 (SFP) No No X Niller, Chrm. Contested hearing. No hearing dates scheduled. (50 226/301) Purdom, Luebre l (West) Robinson, Unit 2 SER X Wolfe, Chatrinan. Pending befor e ASLB. No hearing dates (Increase Power Level) 5/74 Yes Callihan, Cole scheduled. heif

  • II

/ Salem, Unit 1 (5 ) No EIA X Nilhollin, Chairman Contested hearing. No hearing dates (50-272) No Bright, Lamib scheduled. [ West) Imlicates t ? fore which tribunal (s) the case is currently pending.

CASES PENDING BEFORE THE CONilSSION, APPEAL BOARDS AND LICENS!NG BOARDS i' RENihCRS ~ l IAlllllY ~ FES ASLB l',0ARD ASLAB BOARD g 6 ISSUED ASLB* MEMBERS AStAB* MLMIERS COMMISSION

  • HEARING STATUS (Docket No. & vendor) 1.icense Amendment:

? l Trojan (SFP) SER EIA X Jolfe, Chairman Initial Decision before ASLAB for reiiew. (50-344) 11/77 11/77 Cowan, Shon (West) Trojan (Control Building) No iso X tillier, Chairman Contested hearing. (50-344) McCollom, Paxton (West) i North Anna Units 1 EIA Pending before ASLB for ruling on petitions & 2 (SFP) No No X Deale, Chairman to intervene. No dates scheduled for 50-338/339) Hill Stober hearing. We5 L). Zion, Units 1 & 2 Contested hearing. No dates scheduled (SFP) (50-295/304) No EIA X Luton, Chairman for hearing. (West) No Little, Remick Dresden Units 2 & 3 EIA X Lutm, Chairman Contested hearing. No dates scheduled (IFP) (50-237/249) No No Little, Remick for hearing. i (GE) Contested hearing. Special psehearing o t No EIA X M11hollin, Chatrran conference set for 1/10/79. fuel No Johnson, Stober I'50-237/249) GE) + Duke Power Co.(SNH-177 ) (Spent fuel Transporta-No EIA X lazo, Chairman Prehearing conference to consider petitions tion & Storage) No tand, Luebke to intervene held 10/24/78. (70-2623) 1..dtcates before which tritunal(s) the case is currently pending.

a f .k CASES PEN 0thG BEFORE THE C0fMI5510N, APPEAL BOARDS AND L! CENSING BOARDS fALILIIY FES ASLB E0A:D ASLAB BOARD ISSUED ASLB* HEfEERS A511S* HEICERS C0tMI5510N* HEARING STATUS

(Doctet No. & Vendor) 155UED Special

t Contested hearing. In indefinite sus-ig Rock Point No No X Wolfe, Chairmar pension as a result of GESMO decision. IMrease MX fuels) Foreman. Shon 50-155) (GE) l 11dland, Units 1 & 2 X Pending bef ore the Comission awaiting (Attorney Misconduct) N.A. N.A. X Deale, Chairmar. (50-J295P/B05P) Lawrence, Mihollin response of Cooptroller General to questioc regarding payment of attorney expenses. P No hearing dates scheduled. No No X Miller, Chairman e G rator. Paris, Shon 4eplacementI 1 %ff!28' /allecitos Nuclear "O ': enter: GETR (show No X Luton, Chainnan Contested hearing. No hearing dates ause)) Foreman, Linenberger scheduled. (50-70 j [not LWR) Iallecitoa Nuclear Contested hearing. No hearing dates.

enter: GETR No No X

Luton, Chairmar. scheduled. Foreman, Linenberger jgl) lnot LWR) Iallec Hos Nuclear Contested hearing. No hearing dates

enter: (Special No No X

Luton, Chainnan scheduled. tuclear Material) Forenen, Linenberger 70-754) (notLWR) j t Imjicates tiefore which t ritsunal(s) the case is currently pending.

= i ~. CASES PENDING BEFORE THE C0tNISSION, APPEAL BOARDS AND LICENSING BOARDS _ l IACILIlY $[R FES ASLB BOARD A5 TAB BOARD (lhicket Nuu6er) 155UID ISSUED ASLB* MEMBERS ASLAB* MEIEERS C0rmISSION* ItEARING STATUS. Antitrust: Barton, units 1 & 2 N.A. M.A. X Glaser Chairinan Hearing suspendej. Appilcant has deferred (50-524A/525A) Elzinga, Miller plant. Oavis-Besse Units 1 N.A. N.A. X Rosenthal, Chra. Pending before ASLAB for decision. 2&3 Salzman, Sharfman (50-346A/500A/501A) ~ Farley, Units 1 & 2 N.A. N.A. X Farrar. Chra. Pending before ASLAB for decision. (50-348A/364A) Salzman, Sharfman a Midland, Units 1 & 2 N.A. N. A. X Clark, Chairman Pending before ASLB for decision on (50-329A/330A) Leeds, Miller relief. Perry, Units 1 & 2 N.A. N.A. X Rosenthal, Chrm. Pending before ASLAB foi decision. (50-440A/441A) Salzman, Sharfman t l ' St. tucie, Unit 2 N.A. N.A. X Smith, Chatruan Contested hearing. No hearing date (50-389A) Deale, Lazo scheduled. Discovery in process. I c inlicates before which tritunal(s) the case is currently pending. = 4 e <~ ~ ~ ~ - - u--

s a a r r e e d d e e i i t t s s a a. n n ds d s o o s s c c ge ge S nc nc r r U io i o o o T rr rr f f A ap a p T e e n n S hn h n o o i i i i G o o s s N Ny Ny s s I r r i. i.ae R e me r u A .e r v .v n u E go go os as H nc nc Cs Cs is i s i i ri ri e e aD aD rl rl e e oa oa h h f g f g ee ee dd dd bl bl ee ee tl tl gf gf su su no no ed ed i i t e t e dn dn nh nh no no S oc oc ei ei D Cs Cs Pt Pt R AO B N G O N I I S S S X X N l i E t C f I 0 L C DNA SD D R R A AS O OR B BE B L BF A AE E LH P 5 P A A N0 1 B S A l L i S t A to C gn E i H d T D n n n E R a a e R AS m m p r e r n O OR E E ly if i o F BE al at B BF h o h u t LE CW CL n e G SH r N A rr rs r I ee er u D l s l e c N l a l w il io s EP HG MB i S e E s S B a A L X X c C SA e ht D E ) SU A. A. A. A. s ES M M N N ( FS l I a n u b D L ir RU A. A. A. A. t ES SS N N N N h I c i h s w t ) i i e r n r e s 1 U t b t n o f YI m i t a e u n i t l b I N U ) n n ) P ) L A U a A A s I t 9 l 9 t 1 e C e s 9 P 8 n45 t a 4 s 3 i 2 At a t x / u) e / o&/ F x e A aA i A P A id c s k u T 8 l - c 5 30 f( r 9 s4 u 3 y 5 n t h24 i6 L23 es2 n5 kt - i i t t u&0 a- .&0 ri0 n o 5 tP t 5 un5 A S ( S( S1( T U(

S CASES PENDING BEFORE Tile COMMISSION, APPEAL BOARDS AND LICENSING BOARDS l IACILilY SER FES ASLB C0ARD ASLAB BOARD l (iba.ket Nundser) IS50t U ISSUED ASLB* MEM3ERS ASLAB* MEMBERS COMMISSION

  • HEARING STATUS Enforcement Actions:

Atlantic Research Corp. N.A. N.A. ALJ Jensch X Rosenthal, Chr1n. Pending t>efore ASLAB for review of (BR No. 45-02808-04) farrar. Buck decision of Administrative Law Judge. Administrative law Judge isseed Initial Pittsburgh-DesMaines N.A. N.A. ALJ JenscF Decision on 11/24/78, denying and rejecting Steel Co. (PDH} (BML No. 29-13613-02) cIalm for mitigation. Ndiation Technology, N.A. N.A. ALJ Jensch Administrative Law Judge issued initial Inc. Decision affirming civil penalties in the (BR No. 29-13613-02) amount of $3300. thiton Electric Co. N.A. N.A. ASLB Wolf, Chr1n. K Pending before ASLAB for review of (Callaway Plant) Clark, Tubridy Initial Decision. (CPPR-139/140) E Indicates imfore which trilunal(s) the case is currently pending. l

2 CASES PENDING BEFORE THE C0ffilSS10N, APPEAL BOARDS AND LICENSING BOARDS ft,CilllY 5Gi FES ASLB COARD ASLAB BOARD (DAket touc.ber) IS5UED ISSUED ASLB* . MEN ERS ASLAB* MEMERS COP 9tiSS10N* HEARING STATUS' orrel Rulemakings: c Special Nuclear N.A. N.A. Hear-Verkuil, Chrm. Aelting Soard recommendation to Commis- . Material Authority for ing Frings, Hall sion on adoption of the access rule. I Access to or Control l ( Access) i (RM 50-7) 'lUranttmatuelLycle. N.A. N.A. Hear-Glaser. Chatrinan Board issued recommendations to the Ing> acts from Spent X Commission. Participants submitted comunents fuel Reprocessing and ing 3uck, Briggs to Cossnission on recomunendations and requests Radioactive Waste (5-3 i (RM 50-3) for oral presentation. l... s i t t !ndicates before which tribunal (s) the case is currently pending. 4 =}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20147H596&oldid=4178002"